Defense Spending Bill In House Generally Favorable To State

July 29, 1993|By DAVID LIGHTMAN; Washington Bureau Chief

WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee sent a shudder through Connecticut's submarine building industry Wednesday by adopting a defense bill that could make it harder to spend money for the Seawolf and other programs.

"I'm very concerned about this," said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "It could have serious unintended consequences and jeopardize the industrial base."

Yet the $263.4 billion House bill, which spells out how the Pentagon should spend money during the next few years, had generally good news for other Connecticut defense contractors, particularly Textron Lycoming, which makes tank engines in Stratford.

As its Senate counterpart did last week, the House panel approved funds for the F-22 fighter plane, whose engines will be built by Pratt & Whitney; for helicopters produced in Stratford by Sikorsky Aircraft; and the tank engines, which were expected to face trouble in the House.

All of those programs, plus the F-16, whose engines are built by Pratt & Whitney and General Electric Co., got most of the money they wanted. All but the F-16 had fared well in the Senate committee, a strong signal Congress will ultimately give them adequate funding in the 1993-94 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

The House committee, however, balked at being as generous as the Senate to the submarine program.

Instead, it said it would hold off spending certain money for the Seawolf and Centurion submarines until the Pentagon studies the ultimate costs of the first two Seawolfs, both now under construction at the Electric Boat shipyard in Groton. The Defense Department would have to explain not only the price tag, but also where the money would come from.

In effect, the money at issue -- $540 million for the Seawolf and $460 million for other submarine programs -- would be accompanied by an asterisk. It could not be used until the reports

are given to the four committee chairmen who oversee defense spending and they are satisfied the money should be relesased.

The $540 million, which is already available this year, has been widely assumed to be money for a third Seawolf.

The $460 million, which is part of the long-range defense spending bill, was expected to be used for Centurion submarine research and development, among other things. The Centurion is considered the successor to the Seawolf.

The Senate put no restrictions on the submarine money.

Andrea B. Adelman, who keeps track of defense issues for Rep. Sam Gejdenson, D-2nd District, said the House's change resulted from a desire by new House committee Chairman Ronald V. Dellums, D-Calif., to keep a close eye on spending. He imposed similar limits on other projects.

Dellums would not comment, but the committee issued a statement explaining how it wrote the bill. Among the principles were to "cut defense waste and overhead."

But Lieberman was worried. He thought the restriction "frustrates the intentions" of those who originally allocated the money.

They wanted to protect the submarine industrial base, he said, and by not assuring the funds could be used for such a purpose, "It could mean there won't be money to keep the [Seawolf] going, and that could mean layoffs at Electric Boat and at its subcontractors."

Officials at Electric Boat issued a statement expressing concern.

"There appears to be an attempt to obstruct the obligation of funds appropriated for the attack submarine program," it said. But it added that the House action "is the first of many steps in a lengthy process."

The measure will now go to the full House, possibly next week. The Senate version is headed to the full Senate, also next week.

If the two bodies approve their bills, which appears likely, negotiators -- probably including Lieberman -- will work out differences and offer compromises in the early fall.

The bill approved late Tuesday made clear what the major differences could be. For Connecticut, they involve not just the submarine money, but also money for the F-16.

There have been strong efforts to curb the fighter plane program. The Senate committee provided no money, with members such as Lieberman pushing hard for tanks rather than the planes.

But the House panel, which is more heavily influenced by members from Texas, where the plane is assembled, provided enough money for 24 of the aircraft next year.

Experts predicted the F-16 dispute would become a major battle. "The Pentagon already has more F-16s than they know what to do with," said Richard Bitzinger, industry analyst for Washington's Defense Budget Project, a research group. "This is a very political plane."

Also political is the fate of the C-17, a Pratt-powered plane designed to transport oversized cargo. The project has been dogged by charges it is too costly and made too slowly. It has also been hurt by charges of illegal advance payments to McDonnell Douglas Corp., the maker of the C-17 airframe.